aliasgeorge

Elder McConkie took issue with: 1--the concept that we had agency before we were born as spirit children. He taught this by referencing the unified quorum statement: "doctrinal exposition on the father and son" where it says that the "intelligences" that Abraham saw were "spirit children," not any type of pre-spirit birth entities with agency. 2--Any doctrine that defies the truth that God is the supreme power and lawgiver, not subject to anyone else. He counsels that those who would pull out the verse "or God would cease to be God" look up the definition of the word "hyperbole." Of course God wouldn't do anything ungodly, but its not because there is a higher court that will judge him. Its because he wouldn't, because he is God. He can't because its not in His nature. And just as there is Eternal life, there are Eternal laws. Moses 7:35 and D&C 19:10-12 give us some insight as to what that means. You can look up the McConkie references as easy as I can. I believe they are both addressed in the Promised Messiah. Elder McConkie doesn't stand alone in this. He has made his teachings more easily accesible than others though. Elder Bruce Porter has taught it in my ward as well, along with all of the members of the 12 and first presidency who signed the above cited reference. Look, "elder" Skousen, or however you want to refer to him is a good guy. He spent his life teaching and trying to forward the kingdom in ways that would support his family. I have nothing against him, but everything he taught wasn't exactly right. And anything he taught that is inconsitent with a unified priesthood quorum statement is by definition wrong--end of discussion (see D&C 107:27,29).

One of the more recent sources where the church declares that Jesus is the first born spirit child is in the new special edition Ensign on the Living Christ. Jesus is the First born spirit child of the Father.

I respectfully disagree, and you can read my prior post as to why I feel that the "doctrine" teaches otherwise. It is true that God has not revealed to us all the details of this. But if there was no organized pre-spirit being that was "you," it doesn't diminish who you are in the least. There was no organized physical body for me prior to my conception, and that doesn't diminish the body that I have. I think the same can be said for the spirit.

Thanks for the comment. Do you have the references to the BY and SWK quotes? I'd like to read them to see exactly what they said. I'm not disputing that they taught some truth. And all good things come from God. So in part their teachings were good, and in part they were evil (mni 7). I'm not casting judgement on their personal character, nor that it is divine providence that their teachings have taken such a stronghold in the purposes of God. The initial question was what they did to restore the gospel of Jesus Christ on the earth. My answer is that they did not restore anything. They had no priesthood, restored no covenants, no ordinances, did not teach faith in the Son of God, etc. They taught other moral and ethical things, sure. And all good things are inspired by God. But restored the gospel? No way IMO.

I'm glad this reference is in here. This is the man who has propogated the idea that intelligence is matter with some type of agency. He claims that JOhn Widtsoe taught it to him. Did John Widtsoe teach it to anybody else? Bruce R. McConkie taught me that this concept that God is subject to a higher power was absolutely not true. So which second hand account of an apostles teachings do you want to believe? God reigns supreme over all. He is not subject to any higher power. Intelligence, the matter from which we are created, does not hold God accountable for his actions. God is not subject to anything. He reigns supreme. He is the lawgiver. Everything is subject to Him. He is not subject to anything or anyone. Though I imagine Skousen is very well meaning in his works on this subject, this whole concept he has propogated is preposterous and defies many truths of the gospel.

Hoosierguy. This question of Intelligence has come up before, and I wrote a lengthy post a few weeks ago which I will quote below. I have studied, fasted and prayed for understanding on this issue in the past, and will share some of the sources I have subsequently found. Rather than theorize on these questions, I encourage you to find out what the brethren have taught on this issue--not BYU professors, not unofficial publications of 70s, etc, but what the most current teachings in the church are. I have never found anyone who was able to create a case for your viewpoint using the scriptures and priesthood body statements. You are welcome to belief what you want. But since your question is essentially "is it true?", I will post you my belief that no, it is not, and here is why: Getting back to the original question: One must understand what the term "intelligences" means in scripture in order to make sense of what is going on here. "The Father and The Son" A doctrinal exposition signed by the first presidency and quorum of the 12 define "intelligences" as personal spirit children of the Father. In other words, "intelligences"=Spirit child. This isn't my opinion. Look up the source. Thus "intelligences" were already either male or female--they were spirit children. Confusion comes in when the term "intelligence" comes up--that which always existed and is the matter by which our spirits were created. Joseph Smith taught that “the elements are eternal.” (D&C 93:33) Phrased another way, “intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither can be.” (D&C 93:29) All things were created from eternal matter, both physical and spiritual creations alike (see D&C 131:7-8, JD 13:248). The material from which all things were created was in the beginning with God. It has always been, and cannot be created or destroyed. If it were not so, we could not exist forever as resurrected beings with the “spirit and element, inseparably connected,” able to receive a “fulness of joy;” (D&C 93:33-34) for that which has a beginning will in turn have an end (see TPJS 354). Now the question--is "intelligence" the same thing as "intelligences"? Absolutely not. And if anyone can find more reliable sources than what I have produced, please make them known. To finish this discussion, it is important to note that all of the creative accounts which we have been given are limited to a description of the physical creation alone. We have no revealed account of the spirit creation (see Mormon Doctrine “Creation” 170, Doctrines of Salvation 75-76). What we do know is that God “created all things spiritually before they were naturally upon the face of the earth.” (Moses 3:5, 7) We are also told that “that which is spiritual [is] in the likeness of that which is temporal: and that which is temporal, is in the likeness of that which is spiritual: the spirit of man in the likeness of his person, as also the spirit of the beast, and every other creature, which God has created.” (D&C 77:2) From these scriptures, we know that all life was created in spirit before it was created in physical form here on earth, and that the spirit form looked like the physical form it is given here. We also learn that if we have a clear understanding of the truth concerning the physical creation, we can come to understand of the spirit creation as well—for “that which is spiritual [is] in the likeness of that which is temporal.” Knowing this, we should focus on understanding the physical creation as revealed to man through the prophets of God. As for the physical creation, from what is man created? The dust of the earth. All of our bodies are created from the dust of the earth--eternal temporal elements which never had a beginning, nor will they have an end. But, there was a beginning to our physical bodies. For each of us it started in the womb of our respective earthly mothers. Though the element is eternal, never created nor destroyed, there is a defined moment when that element organized into a physical body. So, why should we think the spiritual creation is any different? Why should we assume that "that which is spiritual" is not "in the likeness of that which is temporal"? Does it make rational sense to speculate any other way using the unified priesthood body statements and cannonized scripture as our guide? Did our physical body have some type of pre-organized state which acted as a precursor form which implanted itself into the womb? NO! All matter is completely disorganized in the digestive tract of the mother, and then organized in the womb. So, why would we hold to some notion that we existed in some type of pre-spirit-child organism that somehow had agency (as supposed in the question)? Its preposterous IMO and defies scripture and the words of the prophets. While scripture is silent as to the spirital creation, it has given us the key to understand it--the physical creation. And to understand the physical creation, one must come to believe what the unified first presidency has declared in "the origin of man" document.

I apologize if this sounds coarse or insensitive, but to be blunt, I do not think Muhammed has done anything to help restore the gospel of Jesus Christ. I do not believe he was a prophet of God, otherwise he would have taught that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, not that it was the greatest blasphemy unto death to believe that God had a Son. Kind of a big difference. Yes Islam has much truth in it, but so does every other false religion. And per LDS theology, the church of the devil is any church that is not guided by God. They deceive people away from the truth. They damn the progression of God's children towards faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism by water and fire, and ultimately work to prevent our brothers and sisters from entering into the temple covenants. Is it divine providence that certain religions exist and have grown strong. But they do nothing to forward the restoration. They are put in place so that all the prophecies of God's true prophets are fulfilled every whit, especially leading up to the conflicts of the last day. Other churches are good inasmuch as the churchgoers come to know more truth in them, and work towards greater truth. And this can occur in any church. But if any church works to teach false doctrines that conflict with God's true church, and work to inhibit God's children from accepting all the covenant blessings of Israel, then we can effectively deem that church evil. Thus other churches are good in a sense, especially as pertaining to the membership who come to know God better and learn of Him so they can begin to exercise faith, But they are evil as organizations that propogate damning doctrines of deception. Only one church is guided by God through a living prophet, and thus only one church is forwarding God's work in these last days (ie to graft in Israel and Restore them to the Covenants found in the temple. This is what the restoration is all about).

An interesting question. In reading your perspective on this issue, I will submit to you what I see as the falacy in your argument--that being the definition of "'Truth', which is objectively verifiable and scientifically provable." I do not believe this is what it means if something is true. Truth as I see it (and as taught in LDS theology) is defined in D&C 93:24, which states: "24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;" With this we learn in verse 28 that "28 He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things." I recommend you read D&C 93 and study it to understand the LDS beliefs concerning the words "truth" "light" "knowledge" and "intelligence." God defines them differently than the world does. And it is my personal experience in school (especially graduate level) that the world, or many academics of the world rather, unilaterally define "truth" as something that they must be able to "prove" in and of themselves objectively, in a labratory, etc. Whether or not something is true or not depends nothing on what has been done in the lab. If its true, its true regardless of what your western blot showed last week. And that said, according to the tennets of the scientific method, it is impossible to prove something unless you can test it in a controlled setting, able to control all the variables. Much truth can come out of such a setting, but is there any way to actually do such with life's higher questions? about God? about creation? about death? about life after death? spirituality? karma? revelation? Prayer? No. Its impossible. Science has its theories and observations, but due to the nature of the question and limitations of the scientific method its impossible to "prove" something to the extent to "know the truth" about any of these. Though in some areas godless scientists love to say they have "proven" x, y and z about these, and "thats why their athiest" etc. But they must take the same leap of faith to believe their theories as I do to believe in God--the difference is that God has given us a different way to experiment and come to know Him and His truths--which are THE truth as He defines them in D&C 93. Read D&C 93, Moroni 10:3-5, the Bible Dictionary under "prayer," and the Joseph Smith History in the back of the triple (ie book with the BofM, D&C, and PorGP). Logically there is only one conclusion when it comes to questions of this nature--God must reveal himself to man or remain forever unknown. Man cannot come to know God and His higher truths in and of themselves. Thus each of us here in this life have 2 options: try it God's way=seek him humbly and sincerely, obeying his commandments and repenting of our sins, in prayer and fasting to know if He really is there, asking if the Book of Mormon really is true, and if Joseph Smith really is a prophet, and all the other things that you mentioned that you hear in testimony meeting. The other option--don't do it God's way, and remain forever skeptical, unbelieving, or confused about the personal experiences that others will tell us who chose to do it God's way. A man knows the truth concerning these higher questions, which are unanswerable by the scientific method, only when God tells it to him. And God tells the individual through the Holy Spirit in a way that leaves no question to the individual, but due to the limits of language is extraordinarily difficult to describe and convey to others who have not had such an experience--but God will not be mocked. Only those who do it His way, following His methodology, can ever have the personal experience that leads to "knowing the truth." I would be, and was, a skeptic, until I chose to do it God's way and then God kept His promises to me, his child, so that I Know the Truth. Hope that helps answer the question.

My friend, go to Mormon.org - Home and watch the movies and read the literature there. It is the best representation and most accurate representation of our beliefs. Start there, and if you hear anything that differs with it, its wrong. First, good luck in your spiritual journey for truth. I had mine a decade or so ago, and the one question I had for God is--what is the truth? And in short, the only person any of us can actually believe and trust completely is God himself. So, Why am I a Mormon? I already believed in God, Jesus Christ and the Bible, but I chose to read the Book of Mormon and ask God if it was true. The book itself says that God will tell you through the Spirit (Moroni 10:3-5), so I sincerely sought an answer. Long story short--God said yes, and that He calls prophets still today, and that Joseph Smith was the one who placed His true church on the earth. I have never felt so much joy, peace, love, and comfort in knowing that God still speaks to man--for He had spoken to me personally, and can speak to you personally as well through His spirit, and confirm the truth of the Book of Mormon and the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS. We believe the Bible is scripture, and has the fulness of the gospel. We believe the Book of Mormon is scripture as well. Go to mormon.org and check out the rest of your questions. Good luck with the adventure. God will never fail His children who sincerely seek His counsel.

Interalia, thanks for the comment. As to you and your personal beliefs, you can believe whatever you want to believe. The question I have for you is: upon what are you basing your beliefs? You haven't sited any scriptural reference, nor signed priesthood document. Do you have any upon which you are basing your opinion? This is the huge problem I see in the church. Everybody loves to share their opinion, but the point of the church and the holy Ghost is that we come to know the truth, not philosiphize over what may or may not be. This is true of any and all principles. Many people like to think, but few are willing to pay the price of study, fasting, and prayer to really understand the principles. As for you comment. "Intelligences" did not exist as organized entities until they were born as spirit children of our Heavenly father. Look up and read "The father and the son, doctrinal exposition by the first presidency and the 12." So, why do you and many others believe that intelligences existed as an organized entity before they were born as spirit children? Do you have a reference? Of course some people have taught that, but is it in the scriptures? And what have the unified priesthood bodies said about it? If you're referencing "intelligence"--the matter from which spirit children are made, it had no beginning, nor an end. You physical body is made from "dust" which is matter which had no beginning nor an end. There was no "you" or "pre-you" before you were born as a spirit child. No credible revelatory outlet has ever taught it. Many former and current BYU professors will teach it, but it is contrary to what the unified priesthood body has taught on the matter (see D&C 107:27,29).

Spirits are real. Students of Church History can name a slew of accounts given by the early saints. In fact, if you look up a documentary book on the context behind D&C50, you'll get an idea (see "Revelations of the Restoration" or the autobiography of parly p pratt). Just as Joseph Smith saw God, Cain saw the devil. Opposition in all things. God has his army of the righteous, and the devil has his minions of followers, who go throughout the earth to decieve mankind (see D&C 50:2). Just as the Urim and Thummim is a righteous and holy way for God's annointed to communicate and learn, the devil can use crystals, weegee boards, or anything else as a counterfeit of good. He mimicks God in evil ways so that mankind will get a sour or bad or disbelieving taste in their mouths for the whole subject. This is true of basically every true principle.

I'm sorry to phrase this question so long after the original question, but what is the original quote by Harold B. Lee? It would seem that as this discussion was sparked by the supposed comment, it should be provided. Does anyone have the reference and full quote? Thanks.

Getting back to the original question: One must understand what the term "intelligences" means in scripture in order to make sense of what is going on here. "The Father and The Son" A doctrinal exposition signed by the first presidency and quorum of the 12 define "intelligences" as personal spirit children of the Father. In other words, "intelligences"=Spirit child. This isn't my opinion. Look up the source. Thus "intelligences" were already either male or female--they were spirit children. Confusion comes in when the term "intelligence" comes up--that which always existed and is the matter by which our spirits were created. Joseph Smith taught that “the elements are eternal.” (D&C 93:33) Phrased another way, “intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither can be.” (D&C 93:29) All things were created from eternal matter, both physical and spiritual creations alike (see D&C 131:7-8, JD 13:248). The material from which all things were created was in the beginning with God. It has always been, and cannot be created or destroyed. If it were not so, we could not exist forever as resurrected beings with the “spirit and element, inseparably connected,” able to receive a “fulness of joy;” (D&C 93:33-34) for that which has a beginning will in turn have an end (see TPJS 354). Now the question--is "intelligence" the same thing as "intelligences"? Absolutely not. And if anyone can find more reliable sources than what I have produced, please make them known. To finish this discussion, it is important to note that all of the creative accounts which we have been given are limited to a description of the physical creation alone. We have no revealed account of the spirit creation (see Mormon Doctrine “Creation” 170, Doctrines of Salvation 75-76). What we do know is that God “created all things spiritually before they were naturally upon the face of the earth.” (Moses 3:5, 7) We are also told that “that which is spiritual [is] in the likeness of that which is temporal: and that which is temporal, is in the likeness of that which is spiritual: the spirit of man in the likeness of his person, as also the spirit of the beast, and every other creature, which God has created.” (D&C 77:2) From these scriptures, we know that all life was created in spirit before it was created in physical form here on earth, and that the spirit form looked like the physical form it is given here. We also learn that if we have a clear understanding of the truth concerning the physical creation, we can come to understand of the spirit creation as well—for “that which is spiritual [is] in the likeness of that which is temporal.” Knowing this, we should focus on understanding the physical creation as revealed to man through the prophets of God. As for the physical creation, from what is man created? The dust of the earth. All of our bodies are created from the dust of the earth--eternal temporal elements which never had a beginning, nor will they have an end. But, there was a beginning to our physical bodies. For each of us it started in the womb of our respective earthly mothers. Though the element is eternal, never created nor destroyed, there is a defined moment when that element organized into a physical body. So, why should we think the spiritual creation is any different? Why should we assume that "that which is spiritual" is not "in the likeness of that which is temporal"? Does it make rational sense to speculate any other way using the unified priesthood body statements and cannonized scripture as our guide? Did our physical body have some type of pre-organized state which acted as a precursor form which implanted itself into the womb? NO! All matter is completely disorganized in the digestive tract of the mother, and then organized in the womb. So, why would we hold to some notion that we existed in some type of pre-spirit-child organism that somehow had agency (as supposed in the question)? Its preposterous and defies scripture and the words of the prophets. While scripture is silent as to the spirital creation, it has given us the key to understand it--the physical creation.

Palmoni, I read your question about the Holy Ghost/intelligent reasoning. I believe that perhaps your line of reasing took an incorrect turn due to a misconception concerning "intelligences." Based on your reasoning, you see "intelligence" as a pre-sprit entity, which is organized as a being, but not a spirit child. I would challenge this notion as incorrect. Do you have any credible reference to back yourself? As far as I know, Cleon Skowsen originated this "intelligence theroy" that I've described, and others have supported him in it. the problem is that it is refuted by a first presidency and quorum of the 12 statement entitled "doctrinal exposition of the father and the son." And when the unified priesthood body speaks, you might as well put it in the d&C (see d&c 107:27,29). Here is a little explanation about "intelligences": While Jesus Christ is the creator or organizer of all things under the direction of the Father (see Moses 2:1, Mosiah 3:8), we know that some of God’s other children were involved in the creation with Him. Abraham 3:22-24 says: 22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones; 23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born. 24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; Abraham was shown all the intelligences of our Father in the pre-earth life. It is important to make a clear distinction between “intelligences” and “intelligence.” “By ‘intelligences’ we are to understand ‘personal spirits’” which were created from “intelligence,” or “the light of truth” which “was not created or made, neither indeed can be.” (“The Father and the Son: a doctrinal exposition by the First Presidency and the Twelve” June 30, 1916, D&C 93:29) “Intelligences” is therefore synonymous with “spirit children,” and “intelligence” is the unorganized spirit matter from which God’s children were created. In otherwords, spirit children were created out of unorganized spirit element, which is referred to as "intelligence." When Abraham speaks of "intelligences," which are organized, they are the same as spirit children. Its the same thing as how our physical bodies were created out of the dust of the earth. Physical body:spiritual body as dust of the earth:intelligence.

We must be willing to do this, but we should seek to do many good things of our own free will and choice, without being asked. I think Rameumpton is addressing this--that saints will see their poor neighbor's kids and rather than help them will add a west-wing onto their house... The law of consecration is to be implemented in our own personal lives. It means we must do with our time, talents and resources all that we possibly can to build the kingdom. For some, this may be to save as much money as fast as possible, so that they can retire at 55 and serve the lord full time for the next 30 years, rather than work on their golf game at the local country club. For some, this may be to grow companies so they can employ the poor and give them good jobs. The point is that if we are selfish and glut ourselves with our resources, we will be judged and condemned for it--especially if we neglected to help the poor around us to become rich like them. And I don't think giving them money is the answer--on the contrary. It would be spiritually and temporally damaging to give your neighbor a check for the next 30 years. Offering him a job, or helping pay for his kids missions or college is perhaps mor appropriate--or even helping to support him while he goes back to school. The answer is that we should desire to help others however we can, and look for ways to do so. And especially if the spirit subtly prompts you to help someone, you do it of course. I think Ram. and I were getting off on semantics as to "implementation of the law of consecration." I just did an lds.org search, and seen some prophets use that language to describe the "united order." But we're clear, that the law of consecration is alive and well in our personal lives.

You're right that on a societal level the law of consecration is not being implemented. When is implemented, its called the united order. Maybe this is semantics, but you continue to say: "The Law of Consecration is not currently working in the Church (note the quote I've given before from the current PH/RS manual)." Is the church curriculum commitee your ultimate authority? Which do you put higher, D&C or a church manual? I love the church manuals, and I think they are great, but they are not cannonized scripture. And IMHO the church manuals could be phrased a little better every once and a while. When studying gospel topics, you need to take all things together. Don't hold to one quote in one place, you need to read what all the prophets have said in all the locations. Read D&C 107:27,29 (and scriptures before it to get the context). There is an order to revelation. When the governing priesthood quorum unanimously proclaim something, they take presidence over any and all other things that have been said on the matter. So start with those! And you will find that the law of consecration is "working" in the church on an individual level by the members. It is not "working in the church" on any higher level though. The temple covenants are to be lived here and now. Is there any question as to whether or not we covenant to have sexual relations only when married? Of course not. We promise and then must live that law here and now. How about to conduct our lives according to the law of the gospel found in the scriptures? We promise, and are expected to implement NOW. So, why would anyone think living the law of consecration is anything different? Because they think that the united order is the law of consecration--which would make them think the law of consecration was repealed! False! We promise to live the law of consecration in their personal lives. No, we don't give more than 10% in tithes, but your whole life--time talents and resources--should be dedicated to building up the kingdom of God. That should be the goal and purpose you have in this life, and you should manage your time, talents, money, and any other resources accordingly. I agree with you that some in our church may not be conducting their lives as they ought. Hopefully they're growing to a better life and understanding though. I would take care to judge others and their motives though. Yes there are some selfish people in the church, but the question is: "are they better than they were in the past, and are they moving in the right direction." In addition to this, you don't know the heart of the individuals, and you likely don't know their true motive. Capitalism is a system supported by our church authorities. If you question that, do some research. Its not the perfect system that we will have when Christ returns, but in the interim, it is the system GOD GAVE US through the inspired constitution and founding fathers. If you have a problem with that, do some research as to what the D&C has to say about the divinely inspired constitution. I can see how you could be frustrated with the selfishness that can be seen in the system of capitalism. But the real issue is that God gave man his agency, and God lets man do what he chooses in this life, be it for good or bad. The freedom of our nation is b/c God gave us the constitution to lay the foundation for the restoration. Don't try to change it. You should fight to support and sustain it. And socialism in any of its forms is in direct opposition to the constitution.

(Pres. Benson Cont.) Are we part of the problem or part of the solution? Recently a letter came to my office, accompanied by an article from your Daily Universe, on the matter of BYU students taking food stamps. The query of the letter was: "What is the attitude of the Church on taking food stamps?" The Church's view on this is well known. We stand for independence, thrift, and abolition of the dole. This was emphasized in the Saturday morning welfare meeting of general conference. "The aim of the Church is to help the people to help themselves. Work is to be re-enthroned as the ruling principle of the lives of our Church membership" (Heber J. Grant, Conference Report, October 1936, p. 3). When you accept food stamps, you accept an unearned handout that other working people are paying for. You do not earn food stamps or welfare payments. Every individual who accepts an unearned government gratuity is just as morally culpable as the individual who takes a handout from taxpayers' money to pay his heat, electricity, or rent. There is no difference in principle between them. You did not come to this University to become a welfare recipient. You came here to be a light to the world, a light to society--to save society and to help to save this nation, the Lord's base of operations in these latter days, to ameliorate man's social conditions. You are not here to be a parasite or freeloader. The price you pay for "something for nothing" may be more than you can afford. Do not rationalize your acceptance of government gratuities by saying, "I am a contributing taxpayer too." By doing this you contribute to the problem which is leading this nation to financial insolvency. Society may rationalize immorality, but God cannot condone it. Society sponsors Sabbathbreaking, but the Church counsels otherwise. Society profanes the name of Deity, but Latter-day Saints cannot countenance it. Because society condones a dole, which demoralizes man and weakens his God-given initiative and character, can we? I know what it is, as many of your faculty members do, to work my way through school, taking classes only during winter quarters. If you don't have the finances to complete your education, drop out a semester and go to work and save. You'll be a better man or woman for so doing. You will have preserved your self-respect and initiative. Wisdom comes with experience and struggle, not just with going through a university matriculation. I hope you will not be deceived by current philosophies which will rob you of your godly dignity, self-respect, and initiative, those attributes that make a celestial inheritance possible. It is in that interest, and that only, that I have spoken so plainly to you. My Hope for You, the Youth of Zion In opening my remarks to you, beloved youth of the Church, I attempted to share with you a vision of your eternal possibilities. In closing my remarks, I share with you my hope for you: I hope that you learn through your struggles the joy of achievement. I hope that you recognize in the gospel of Jesus Christ a solution to our problems, temporal and spiritual. I hope that you marry well, live together in love, rear a family in righteousness, and have joy and rejoicing in your posterity. I hope that you follow the example and counsel of him whom the Lord has appointed as prophet, seer, and revelator. I hope that you learn the joy of work, the ability to postpone wants, and the economic independence not to be a slave to any man. I hope that you keep yourselves clean morally and spiritually, that your confidence will wax strong in the presence of God, as the scriptures say, and the Holy Ghost will be your constant companion (see D&C 121:45–46). I hope that you will be united in philosophy, purpose, and action to the laws of the celestial kingdom. I pray God's choicest blessings on you, my beloved brethren and sisters. May I say to you that there isn't anything in this world that's right that the leadership of this Church wouldn't do for the youth of the Church; and so I hope and pray that you realize the hope of those who love you and serve you and the possibilities of your potential as sons and daughters of God. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

For those who want to hear what a prophet of God has to say about it, here we go: A Vision and a Hope for the Youth of Zion EZRA TAFT BENSON ________________________________________ Ezra Taft Benson was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when this devotional address was given at Brigham Young University on 12 April 1977. © Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved. Complete volumes of Speeches are available wherever LDS books are sold. For further information contact: Speeches, 218 University Press Building, Provo, Utah 84602. (801) 422-2299 / E-mail: [email protected] / Speeches Home Page ________________________________________ My beloved brethren and sisters, humbly and gratefully I stand before you this morning and seek an interest in your faith and prayers that the message that I have may be accompanied by the Spirit. It is a wonderful sight that I view here this morning. It is good to be with you, my beloved young friends, distinguished members of the faculty, and special guests. My wife and I have just returned from a glorious weekend at St. George, where I had the privilege of addressing three overflow audiences, two in the largest auditorium they have at Dixie College and made up largely of young people, and one on the fourth floor of the temple in a Solemn Assembly. We were honoring the centennial of the dedication of the St. George Temple, the first one to be erected in the western part of the country. We are still basking in the aftermath of another great general conference of the Church. Never in my memory have we had more explicit warnings from prophets of God; and nowhere in the world are there men better prepared or more obligated to issue such warnings. The Celestial Kingdom Today I want to discuss some principles and laws of the celestial kingdom, and some of the fallacies of their perverted counterfeits in the world. I share with you a vision of your eternal possibilities. The celestial kingdom, residence of God, our Eternal Father, is comprised of men and women who have complied with divine law and who were not deceived by the craftiness of men or the doctrines of devils. They are just men made perfect through the mediation and atonement of Jesus Christ (see D&C 76:69). They are obedient to celestial law; for, as the Lord has said, he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory (D&C 88:22). Celestial laws, embodied in certain ordinances belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ, are complied with by voluntary covenants. The laws are spiritual. Thus, our Father in Heaven has ordained certain holy sanctuaries, called temples, in which these laws may be fully explained, the laws include the law of obedience and sacrifice, the law of the gospel, the law of chastity, and the law of consecration. I want to speak more particularly this morning about this one law--the law of consecration. It is that one's time, talents, strength, property, and money are given up to the Lord for the express purpose of building up the kingdom of God and establishing Zion on the earth. Or, as we read in Doctrine and Covenants 105:5, "Zion cannot be built up unless it is by the principles of the law of the celestial kingdom." Much has been written about this law and its attempted implementations in the early history of the Church; and much deception has taken root, even among some of our members, because of misinformed opinion or misguided interpretations. Some view it as merely an economic alternative to capitalism or the free enterprise system, others as an outgrowth of early communal experiments in America. Such a view is not only shortsighted but tends to diminish in importance a binding requirement for entrance into the celestial kingdom. The law of consecration is a celestial law, not an economic experiment. The vehicle for implementing the law of consecration is the united order. The basic principle underlying the united order is that everything we have belongs to the Lord; and, therefore, the Lord may call upon us for any and all of our property, because it belongs to him. The united order was entered by "a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken" (D&C 42:30), according to the scriptures. In other words, an individual conveys his titles to all his property to the Church through the bishop. The property becomes the property of the Church. You read about this in the forty-second section of the Doctrine and Covenants. The bishop then deeds back to the consecrator by legal instrument the amount of personal property required by the individual for the support of himself and his family, as the Lord declares, "according to his circumstances and his wants and needs" (D&C 51:3). This becomes the private, personal property of the individual to develop as he sees fit. It is his stewardship. When an individual produces a profit or surplus more than is needful for the support of himself and his family, the surplus is then placed in the bishops storehouse to administer to the poor and the needy. Under the united order, idleness has no place, and greed, selfishness, and covetousness are condemned. The united order may therefore operate with only a righteous people. It has been erroneously concluded by some that the united order is both communal and communistic in theory and practice because the revelations speak of equality. Equality under the united order is not economic and social leveling as advocated by some today. Equality, as described by the Lord, is "equal[ity] according to [a man's] family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs" (D&C 51:3). Is the united order a communal system? Emphatically not. It never has been and never will be. It is "intensely individualistic." Does the united order eliminate private ownership of property? No. "The fundamental principle of this system [is] the private ownership of property" (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Conference Report, October 1942, p. 57). Two separate groups of saints have fully implemented this divine law. The first was the united order under Enoch, wherein the Lord designated this people Zion, "because they were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them." We read of this in the seventh chapter, eighteenth verse, of Moses, in the Pearl of Great Price. A second instance was the Nephite civilization following the visit of the Savior to the Western Hemisphere after his resurrection. This is recorded in 4 Nephi, the third verse particularly. The failure of the early Saints in this dispensation to live according to the fulness of the law is explained by the Lord in revelations recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants, sections 101 and 105. I repeat and emphasize that the law of consecration is a law for an inheritance in the celestial kingdom. God, the Eternal Father, his Son Jesus Christ, and all holy beings abide by this law. It is an eternal law. It is a revelation by God to his Church in this dispensation. Though not in full operation today, it will be mandatory for all Saints to live the law in its fulness to receive celestial inheritance. You young people today abide a portion of this higher law as you tithe, pay a generous fast offering, go on missions, and make other contributions of money, service, and time. Satan's Counterfeit System But whenever the God of heaven establishes by revelation his design, Satan always comes among men to pervert the doctrine, saying, "Believe it not." He often establishes a counterfeit system, designed to deceive the children of men. His aim, as it was before the foundation of this earth was laid, is to thwart the agency of man and to subjugate him. Throughout all ages of mankind, the adversary has used human agents and despotic governments to establish his purpose. Satan is determined to destroy all that is dear, all that will ennoble and exalt man to a celestial kingdom. Isaiah foresaw the time when a marvelous work and a wonder would come forth among men (see Isaiah 29:14). Isaiah also predicted that there would be those that "seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the dark, and they [shall] say, Who seeth us?" (Isaiah 29:15). He saw the time when the work, man, shall say of him that made him, "He made me not," denying his creation (see Isaiah 29:16). It is well to ask what self-proclaimed atheists came on the human scene following the restoration of the gospel, who established secret works of darkness to overthrow nations by violent revolution and who blasphemously proclaimed the atheistic doctrine that God made us not. Yes, Satan works through human agents. We need only look to some of the ignoble figures in human history who were contemporary to the restoration of the gospel to discover fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy. I refer to the infamous founders of communism, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Today, if we are alert, we can see further fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecies. Communism--a System Antithetical to the Gospel of Christ Through the instigation of Marx and Engels, a most successful counterfeit to the united order was introduced into the world. The declaration of principles found in their Manifesto to the World advocated the overthrow of capitalism and free enterprise, the abolition of private property, the elimination of the family as a social unit, the abolition of all classes, the overthrow of all governments, and the establishment of communal ownership of property in a classless, stateless society. All this was to be accomplished by revolution. On July 3, 1936, the First Presidency published this warning to Church members. I quote it in part; I hope you will get a copy of the full statement for your files. In part, the statement reads: . . . Communism is not a political party, nor a political plan under the Constitution; it is a system of government that is the opposite of our Constitutional government. . . . Since Communism, established, would destroy our American Constitutional government, to support Communism is treasonable to our free institutions, and no patriotic American citizen may become either a Communist or supporter of Communism. To our Church members we say, Communism is not the United Order, and bears only the most superficial resemblance thereto. Communism is based upon intolerance and force, the United Order upon love and freedom of conscience and action. . . . Communists cannot establish the United Order, nor will Communism bring it about. . . . Communism being thus hostile to loyal American citizenship and incompatible with true Church membership, of necessity no loyal American citizen and no faithful Church member can be a Communist. We call upon all Church members completely to eschew [and shun] Communism. The safety of our divinely inspired Constitutional government and the welfare of our Church imperatively demand that Communism shall have no place in America. Signed, President Heber J. Grant J. Reuben Clark, Jr. David O. McKay The First Presidency You students have only to read some of the speeches and writings of the exiled Russian Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn to appreciate this farsighted warning of the First Presidency. I have been on both sides of the Iron Curtain several times. I have talked to these godless leaders face to face. I say to you with all the sincerity of my soul that since 1933 this godless counterfeit to the gospel has made tremendous progress towards its objective of world domination, for over one-third of the human family are now under totalitarian subjugation. Today we are in a battle for the bodies and souls of men. It is a battle between two opposite systems: freedom and slavery, Christ and anti-Christ. The struggle today is more momentous than a decade ago, yet today the conventional wisdom, so called, is that we have got to learn to live with communism, to give up our ideas about national sovereignty. You hear that repeated today. Tell that to the millions--yes, the scores of millions--who have met death or imprisonment under the tyranny of communism. Learn to live with communism? Such would be the death knell of freedom and all we hold dear. The gospel of Jesus Christ can prosper only in an atmosphere of freedom. As members of his Church, we have a major responsibility to do all in our power to see that freedom is preserved and safeguarded. I pray that God will bless you to see communism for what it really is: the greatest system of human slavery that the world has ever known. May you not be deceived into believing that the communists have moderated their goal toward world domination. I say to you that so-called detente is a fraud. Time will prove it to be such. There is no excuse for any BYU instructor to grant a forum to an avowed communist for the purpose of teaching communism on this campus. It may be done on other campuses in the United States, but it will not be done here. Socialism--a Philosophy Incompatible with Man's Liberty Another notable counterfeit system to the Lord's plan is collectivized socialism. Socialism derives its philosophy from the founders of communism, Marx and Engels. Communism in practice is socialism. Its purpose is world socialism, which the communists seek to achieve by revolution, and which the socialists seek to achieve by evolution. Both communism and socialism have the same effect upon the individual--a loss of personal liberty. As was said so well by President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., "The two are as two peas in a pod in their ultimate effect upon our liberties." Why is socialism incompatible with man's liberty? Socialism cannot work except through an all-powerful state. The state has to be supreme in everything. When individuals begin to exert their God-given rights, the state has to suppress that freedom. So belief in God must be suppressed, and with that gone freedom of conscience and religion must also go. Those are the first of our liberties mentioned in the Bill of Rights. There are some among us who would confuse the united order with socialism. That is a serious misunderstanding. It is significant to me that the Prophet Joseph Smith, after attending lectures on socialism in his day, made this official entry in the Church history: "I said I did not believe the doctrine" (Joseph Smith, History of the Church 6:33). Socialism Disguised under Welfare State Measures As citizens of this noble land, we have marched a long way down the soul-destroying road of socialism. If you question that statement, consider the recent testimonial from the Nobel prize-winning economist, Milton Friedman. He indicated that government spending in the United States at all levels amounts to over forty percent of today's total national income. If we continue to follow the trend in which we are heading today, two things will inevitably result: first, a loss of our personal freedom, and second, financial bankruptcy. This is the price we pay when we turn away from God and the principles which he has taught and turn to government to do everything for us. It is the formula by which nations become enslaved. This nation was established by the God of heaven as a citadel of liberty. A constitution guaranteeing those liberties was designed under the superintending influence of heaven. I have recounted here before what took place in the St. George Temple when the Founding Fathers of this nation visited President Wilford Woodruff, who was then a member of the Twelve and not president of the Church. The republic which was established was the most nearly perfect system which could have been devised to lead men toward celestial principles. We may liken our system to the law of Moses which leads men to the higher law of Christ. Today, two hundred years later, we must sadly observe that we have significantly departed from the principles established by the founders of our country. James Madison opposed the proposal to put Congress in the role of promoting the general welfare according to its whims in these words: If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every state, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasure; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor. . . . Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for [and it was an issue then], it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.

I am amazed by some of your comments on here. First, let us remember what the war in heaven was over--agency. Satan's plan mimicked the plan of our Heavenly father, but personal agency was removed. This is the difference between Socialism and the united order--agency. In a socialistic government, one doesn't choose to give their excess, but rather have their goods taken from them. No choice lies with the individual. In the united order, people make their own choices as to what their level of need is, and then they give the excess because they choose to. As such under the united order, people become good people because they choose to be good people. Under socialism, people do not become better people, but rather they lose incentive to work hard, and lose all incentive to be charitable--becuase the government is doing all that. Rather than choosing to help those in need, they are incentivized to hold on and hide all that they have. Socialism breeds a totally different individual than the united order does. Socialism removes agency, and the united order relies on it. As such, socialism is compulsion, united order grants choice. And because agency is alive and well under the united order, when people are greedy it doesn't work (as exemplified by the early saints). Another point, the law of consecration is not the same thing as the united order. The united order was the practical implementation of the law of consecration in the early days of the church. This united order is no longer practiced, but the law of consecration was never rescinded. Any endowed individual knows that they have promised to live the law of consecration. Do not fool yourselves into believing that it no longer applies to you. You covenanted to obey it. But how it should be applied in our lives without the united order is a totally different discussion.

Thats fine. We don't have any clear teachings concerning the specifics in this area. I personally do not think that the pre-spirit-creation/organization before we were spiritually born makes any sense when trying to bring all gospel truths together into one whole. But we'll all know these things in clear and explicit detail in a future day.

I agree with you. I was trying to convey that the person this individual should counsel with for advice concerning his personal situation is his bishop. If the individual uses this info as the basis for what he thinks should happen, and then cousels with his/her bishop who knows the personal situation, has guidance, etc, and the bishop disagrees with the notions the individual takes out of this forum, then it doesn't matter what anyone in the forum says. I was just sayin that the best way to approach personal issues is to talk to the bishop about them, rather than rely on an annonymous internet community for advice. Thus my advice is to go ask the question phrased in this forum to your bishop, and counsel with him rather than relying on this forum for answers. I agree with you about tithing and personal choice. I think also that some make a personal choice that isn't a full tithe as well, but thats between the individual and God.

Neither is an account of the spirit creation. Some like to think Moses's is a spiritual account, but I don't believe it is. BRMcConkie in Mormon Doctrine under "creation" (i think) says there is no account of the spirit creation. All 4 accounts (Genesis, moses, abraham, and the temple) are accounts of the physical creation alone. This concords with JFSmith's writings in doctrines of salvation. Can you give me a better source (more credible) than that which would say otherwise? I've never seen one. I've only seen college professors theorizing trying to come up with a "fresh" and new idea to publish books and push the academic buck IMHO. Let me know if you have a good source. As to "the beginning," you should go read the promised messiah chapters that I wrote a post or two ago. Elder McConkie gives clear and concrete explanations of these terms which opened my mind to understand what the scriptures mean when they say: "in the begninning," "eternity," "eternity to eternity," "worlds without end," and other terms like that. They don't mean the same thing, but signifiy specific and distinct things.

These questions are digging into areas where the scriptures do not go, and as such, there is endless speculation about this. the scriptures do not describe our spiritual creation. Just the physical creation. What it does say, however, is that the "spiritual is in the likeness of the physical" creation (parapharasing). So, how are our physical bodies created? Well, they are made from the dust of the earth--or matter unorganized. Did God create us? Yes. What does the word "create" mean? "to organzize." Where is the dust of the earth/unorganized matter orgaized to make a body for us? In the womb of the mother. Every ounce of food consumed by the mother of a child is broken down into the building blocks of life, absorbed into her body, and then organized into a body for our spirit. This is how every form of life on earth is created. Matter unorganized is ordered in the wom of the mother. Like after like. Thus men make men, bears make bears, lions make lions, fish make fish, etc. etc. All physical bodies are created from the dust of the earth--or matter unorganized. Now, what of the spirit creation? We know that it is in the likeness of the physical. So we can speculate parallels. now I ask you this? Do you need a man and a woman to be exalted and to have a continuation of the seed? Is there Mother in heaven as well? Is gender eternal? Do those exalted individuals resurrect with all of their parts? Is it any wonder then why the first presidency would make it absolutely clear that "intelligences" refers specifically to spirit child? Organized spirits are created after the likeness of organized bodies. The spiritual element which God organized into spiritual bodies is termed "intelligence." So intelligence:dust of the earth; intelligences: organized body; intelligence: broken-down carbon molecules; spirit child: physical body; intelligence=unorganized matter; intelligences=a spirit-born child. There is no organized spirit essence that precedes a spirit-birth, just as there is no organize physical essence that precedes a physical birth. All man was equal in the beginning, and that beginning was when we were born to our literal parents in the spirit world, and God the Father is our literal spirit father. The unorganized matter with which we were formed is eternal, just as the physical matter with which we were formed is eternal. Thus we can be eternal beings, as our matter has no beginning, and will have no end. In the Gospel, The word "father" actually and literally means "father." the word "son" actually and literally means "son." and the word "mother" actually and literally means "mother." when pertaining to creation. When it comes to Jesus as the Father, this is by adoption as he bought us with a price, and we are spiritually (figuratively) begotten sons and daughters of Him.

HiJolly, I thought that was a well-stated opinion. I disagree, as I imagine you could've guessed, but well-stated.

Now this is a question you should go ask your bishop. It doesn't matter what any of us thinks. He'll have the answer for you. And if he isn't sure, he'll ask up the chain for you.